Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/173,878

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED DIGITAL PREDICTIVE INSIGHTS FOR USER INTERFACES

Final Rejection §101§102§103§112
Filed
Feb 24, 2023
Examiner
TRAN, DANIEL DUC
Art Unit
2147
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
The Toronto -Dominion Bank
OA Round
2 (Final)
0%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
0%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allow Rate
0 granted / 1 resolved
-55.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
36
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§112
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/24/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “Neural network models each configured to” in claim 23 “a profiling module for” in claim 23 “an insight generation module to” in claim 23 “a content generation module to” in claim 23 “a feedback detection module to” in claim 23 Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim limitation “a profiling module”, “an insight generation module”, “a content generation module”, and “a feedback detection module” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. no association between the structure and the function can be found in the specification. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. Examiner notes that for examination purposes the “a profiling module”, “an insight generation module”, “a content generation module”, and “a feedback detection module” will be examined as a generic processor Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In reference to claim 1: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “dynamically determine from the predicted data transfer trends of the machine learning model and the historical data transfers, prior factors historically influencing data transfers and thereby a set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine prior factors historically influencing data transfers from the predicted data transfer trends. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “A computer system for presenting actionable icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) of a computer device, the computer system comprising: at least one processor; and a memory in communication with the at least one processor, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the at least one processor, configure the system to:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “track electronic data transfers comprising interactions between one or more data records and data transfer attributes comprising types of data transfers and associated computing devices performing the data transfers;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “provide the electronic data transfers and attributes to a predictive machine learning model having at least one neural network to predict future data transfers and data transfer trends associated with the one or more data records,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “the model being trained on prior historical data transfers comprising historical changes to the data records and historical data transfer attributes;” “automatically trigger a digital nudge to the computer device, across a communications network, to automatically present the predicted future data transfers and the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers as one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface for subsequent engagement;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and, responsive to a determination of engagement with the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the computer device, the processor triggering generating one or more action icons on the graphical user interface of the computer device, the action icons customized to adjusting the predicted future data transfers and the data transfer trends.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “A computer system for presenting actionable icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) of a computer device, the computer system comprising: at least one processor; and a memory in communication with the at least one processor, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the at least one processor, configure the system to:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “track electronic data transfers comprising interactions between one or more data records and data transfer attributes comprising types of data transfers and associated computing devices performing the data transfers;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “provide the electronic data transfers and attributes to a predictive machine learning model having at least one neural network to predict future data transfers and data transfer trends associated with the one or more data records,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “the model being trained on prior historical data transfers comprising historical changes to the data records and historical data transfer attributes;” “automatically trigger a digital nudge to the computer device, across a communications network, to automatically present the predicted future data transfers and the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers as one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface for subsequent engagement;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and, responsive to a determination of engagement with the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the computer device, the processor triggering generating one or more action icons on the graphical user interface of the computer device, the action icons customized to adjusting the predicted future data transfers and the data transfer trends.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 4: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “determining whether a positive response indicating the visual insight icons comprising a set of data transfer insights as helpful; a neutral response indicating the visual insight icons comprising the data transfer insights were not interacted with; or a negative response indicating the visual insight icons comprising the data transfer insights were unhelpful was received on the graphical user interface of the computer device.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine if response is positive, neutral, or negative based on the feedback. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “The system of claim 1, wherein a determination of engagement, further comprises: tracking feedback input received on the graphical user interface of the computer device comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “The system of claim 1, wherein a determination of engagement, further comprises: tracking feedback input received on the graphical user interface of the computer device comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 6: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “determine, from the database, similar users based on the profile attributes of the user;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine similar users based on profile attributes of the user. “grouping the similar users into clusters on the database;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could group the similar users into clusters. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “The system of claim 5, wherein presenting the visual insight icons further comprises the instructions configuring the system to: dynamically generate content for the visual insight icons further based on: extracting, from a database, profile attributes of a user associated with the electronic data transfers for the one or more data records;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and responsive to said grouping, generate similar content for the visual insight icons for the similar users based on historical knowledge of insights having a positive rating by prior users.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “The system of claim 5, wherein presenting the visual insight icons further comprises the instructions configuring the system to: dynamically generate content for the visual insight icons further based on: extracting, from a database, profile attributes of a user associated with the electronic data transfers for the one or more data records;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and responsive to said grouping, generate similar content for the visual insight icons for the similar users based on historical knowledge of insights having a positive rating by prior users.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 7: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The system of claim 6, wherein the instructions further configure the system to: determine, from the predictive machine learning model, a degree of confidence related to the predicted future data transfers” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine a degree of confidence related to the predicted future data transfers. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and retrieve a set of corresponding templates from the database for presenting the one or more interactive visual insight icons based on the degree of confidence wherein each of the templates is defined as associated with a range of degree of confidence.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and retrieve a set of corresponding templates from the database for presenting the one or more interactive visual insight icons based on the degree of confidence wherein each of the templates is defined as associated with a range of degree of confidence.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 8: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The system of claim 1 wherein generating the one or more action icons further comprises the instructions configuring the system to: dynamically determine one or more potential actions relating to interacting with the one or more data records to improve the predicted future data transfers associated with the one or more data records,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine one or more potential actions relating to interacting with the one or more data records to improve the predicted future data transfers. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and present the actions as content for the action icons to graphical user interface of the computing device.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and present the actions as content for the action icons to graphical user interface of the computing device.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 9: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further configure the system to: select a first trained neural network from a plurality of trained neural networks to predict the future data transfers based on the data transfer attributes,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could select a first trained neural network based on the data transfer attributes. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “wherein different predicted future data transfers are predicted associated with a particular category of data transfer attributes.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “wherein different predicted future data transfers are predicted associated with a particular category of data transfer attributes.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 11: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a machine Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further configure the system to: determine a confidence score for the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could _. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and dynamically manage and adjust a presentation of insights presented in the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface based on the determined confidence score of the set of factors.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and dynamically manage and adjust a presentation of insights presented in the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface based on the determined confidence score of the set of factors.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 12: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “dynamically determining from the predicted data transfer trends of the machine learning model and the historical data transfers, prior factors historically influencing data transfers and thereby a set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine prior factors historically influencing data transfers from the predicted data transfer trends. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “A computer implemented method for presenting actionable icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) of a computer device, the method comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “tracking electronic data transfers comprising interactions between one or more data records and data transfer attributes comprising types of data transfers and associated computing devices performing the data transfers;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “providing the electronic data transfers and attributes to a predictive machine learning model having at least one neural network to predict future data transfers and data transfer trends associated with the one or more data records,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “the model being trained on prior historical data transfers comprising historical changes to the data records and historical data transfer attributes;” “automatically triggering a digital nudge to the computer device, across a communications network, to automatically present the predicted future data transfers and the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers as one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface for subsequent engagement;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and, responsive to a determination of engagement with the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the computer device, the processor triggering generating one or more action icons on the graphical user interface of the computer device, the action icons customized to adjusting the predicted future data transfers and the data transfer trends.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “A computer implemented method for presenting actionable icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) of a computer device, the method comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “tracking electronic data transfers comprising interactions between one or more data records and data transfer attributes comprising types of data transfers and associated computing devices performing the data transfers;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “providing the electronic data transfers and attributes to a predictive machine learning model having at least one neural network to predict future data transfers and data transfer trends associated with the one or more data records,” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “the model being trained on prior historical data transfers comprising historical changes to the data records and historical data transfer attributes;” “automatically triggering a digital nudge to the computer device, across a communications network, to automatically present the predicted future data transfers and the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers as one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface for subsequent engagement;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and, responsive to a determination of engagement with the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the computer device, the processor triggering generating one or more action icons on the graphical user interface of the computer device, the action icons customized to adjusting the predicted future data transfers and the data transfer trends.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 15: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “determining whether a positive response indicating the visual insight icons comprising a set of data transfer insights as helpful; a neutral response indicating the visual insight icons comprising the data transfer insights were not interacted with; or a negative response indicating the visual insight icons comprising the data transfer insights were unhelpful was received on the graphical user interface of the computer device.” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine if response is positive, neutral, or negative based on the feedback. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “The method of claim 12, wherein a determination of engagement, further comprises: tracking feedback input received on the graphical user interface of the computer device comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “The method of claim 12, wherein a determination of engagement, further comprises: tracking feedback input received on the graphical user interface of the computer device comprising:” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 17: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “determining, from the database, similar users based on the profile attributes of the user;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine similar users based on profile attributes of the user. “grouping the similar users into clusters on the database;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could group the similar users into clusters. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “The method of claim 16, wherein presenting the visual insight icons further comprises: dynamically generating content for the visual insight icons further based on: extracting, from a database, profile attributes of a user associated with the electronic data transfers for the one or more data records;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and responsive to said grouping, generating similar content for the visual insight icons for the similar users based on historical knowledge of insights having a positive rating by prior users.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “The method of claim 16, wherein presenting the visual insight icons further comprises: dynamically generating content for the visual insight icons further based on: extracting, from a database, profile attributes of a user associated with the electronic data transfers for the one or more data records;” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). “and responsive to said grouping, generating similar content for the visual insight icons for the similar users based on historical knowledge of insights having a positive rating by prior users.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 18: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The method of claim 17 further comprising: determining, from the predictive machine learning model, a degree of confidence related to the predicted future data transfers” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine a degree of confidence related to the predicted future data transfers. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and retrieving a set of corresponding templates from the database for presenting the one or more interactive visual insight icons based on the degree of confidence wherein each of the templates is defined as associated with a range of degree of confidence.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and retrieving a set of corresponding templates from the database for presenting the one or more interactive visual insight icons based on the degree of confidence wherein each of the templates is defined as associated with a range of degree of confidence.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 19: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The method of claim 12 wherein generating the one or more action icons further comprises: dynamically determining one or more potential actions relating to interacting with the one or more data records to improve the predicted future data transfers associated with the one or more data records,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could determine one or more potential actions relating to interacting with the one or more data records to improve the predicted future data transfers. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and presenting the actions as content for the action icons to graphical user interface of the computing device.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and presenting the actions as content for the action icons to graphical user interface of the computing device.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 20: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The method of claim 12 further comprising: selecting a first trained neural network from a plurality of trained neural networks to predict the future data transfers based on the data transfer attributes,” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could select a first trained neural network based on the data transfer attributes. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “wherein different predicted future data transfers are predicted associated with a particular category of data transfer attributes.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “wherein different predicted future data transfers are predicted associated with a particular category of data transfer attributes.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In reference to claim 22: Step 1 - Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, the claim is directed to a process Step 2A Prong 1 - Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? “The method of claim 12, further comprising: determining a confidence score for the set of factors likely to influence the predicted future data transfers;” which is an abstract idea because it is directed to a mental process, an observation, evaluation, judgement, or opinion. The limitation as drafted, and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill)(c)). For example, a person could _. Step 2A Prong 2 - Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? “and dynamically managing and adjusting a presentation of insights presented in the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface based on the determined confidence score of the set of factors.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim does not include additional elements that are integrated into a practical application. Step 2B - Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? “and dynamically managing and adjusting a presentation of insights presented in the one or more interactive visual insight icons on the graphical user interface based on the determined confidence score of the set of factors.” is merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 24, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103
Feb 10, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2026
Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
0%
Grant Probability
0%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month